Conservative Home's debate blogs

Advertising

  • DVD rental
  • Conservative Books
My Photo

Conservative blogs

Blog powered by Typepad

  • Tracker 2
  • Extreme Tracker

« A series of appointments strengthens the Davis campaign | Main | Voting prediction winners »

Comments

James Hellyer

"That's why the "And Theory" works here"

By delivering lower spending in real terms?

Derek

I note the various comments on immigration. To those who say it must not be a dominant theme as it makes us seem nasty in some way, I would ask this: Are we a party of principle, or simply a sort of focus group led party that hope to gain power by not saying anything controversial?

The current levels will lead to a million extra people every three years. How can we not bring that to the attention of the public? As to adopting an "open door" policy, that would be political suicide.

Lancake

Well, spending would be higher in real terms (ie factoring out inflation), but as long as you increase spending by less than the GDP growth rate, you can lower taxes too. Crudely, if the economy grows by 3% and you raise spending by 2%, you can cut taxes by 1% (all in real terms).

Gordon's magic formula has been to stifle wealth creation and then expect the wealth creating sectors of the economy to fund spending (sorry, "investment" we call it now in this brave new world) on thousands more bureaucrats, propping up an unreformed NHS and waging illegal wars. Nice one Gord.

If either of the Davids has an ounce of leadership skill, they should be able to make mincemeat of that old socialist recipe.

michael

Derek, it was precisely because immigration was a focus group issue where we had a lead over Labour, that the issue was used so prominently in the 2005 campaign.

Yes difficult issues should be highlighted, but the Party musn't define it's image on individual policies. We've got to have a broader narrative and a consistent strategy.

Sam

Come on James Hellyer, which runners did you support in the previous 3 leadership contests?

Don't be shy now

James Hellyer

Which 3 leadership contests? Which rounds?

I'll make it simple- did you support Hague's leadership challenge in 1997 & IDS's in 2001?

James Hellyer

As I said, in which rounds?

Lancake

Whichever, any, all... the blogging world needs to know...

Sean Fear


Derek's point is a reasonable one though. Do most people here think that immigration on its current scale (or maybe an even bigger scale) poses no problems for this country, or do they think it does pose problems? If the latter, do they think a responsible party should have policies on it, or do they think it is too much of a hot potato politically?

Elena

I supported Hague (gulp) in 1997.

I supported IDS (gulp) in 2001.

I supported Clarke initially in this election, but after realising he wasn't going to win I suppose you could class me as a Cameron supporter. The only reason I am such a big supporter, however, is because, for me, it's "Anyone But Davis."

Rob

I supported Redwood in 1997, very embarressed about that one, but then supported Hague.

In 2001 I thought there were no good candidates to be honest and this time round supported Fox and now dont know who to vote for. I think Davis is a bit rubbish really, but I really dont like Cameron and his whole ideology. Any ideas?

James Hellyer

Howard '97 (although I think Lilley would have been good in the job, given a little coaching)

2001... Ancram, because there didn't seem to be any good candidates and at least I like him.

2005... Dr Fox, obviously. Until now.

James Maskell

97-wasnt even politically aware at all. Think I wanted to be a priest at the time!!!

2001-Wasnt in country or very aware of details in the Party but liked Portillo.

2005-Clarke. Im now much more aware of what I believe so this is the first proper leadership election Ive followed.

As for who Ill support in this round....I dont think DD is the right man. Neither do I think Cameron is right. DD is weak at speaking, an essential skill for leadership but looks like a leader. Cameron can talk but is policy-wise weak.

Selsdon Man

"Think I wanted to be a priest at the time!!!"

Tim will be recruiting you to CCF.

Portillo and Clarke!! I hope that you are not a gambler.

James Maskell

Im not a practicing Christian. I think it was a phase I went through. After that I wanted to be a lawyer but when on work experience with a local solicitors in November 1998 saw a mother of 4 being taken to court for a speeding ticket because her kids took too long getting ready and she knew she'd be in huge trouble if the kids were late for school. That turned me to politics.

Im no betting/gambling man. Rubbish at it. I prefer to laugh at those losing their money...bit of schadenfreude goes down a treat!

Henry Cook

'97 - Hague, because he had a funny voice (I was 11 at the time)
'01 - IDS, because he seemed to have strong right-wing ideas (I was naive at the time)
'05 - Cameron, because I think I understand why we've been losing elections.

Rick

"m not a practicing Christian"


Shame on you ! You cannot spell "practising" besides which you admit to being an unwashed heathen.

James Maskell

I thought I was wrong there...Grammar School education wasted there! "unwashed heathen"...cheers for that. I just dont think I need organised religion to tell me how to live my life. I treat people properly and ask for nothing in return. Im not expecting a place in heaven, but Im hoping Ive got an outside chance... Being a Tory though might ruin those chances tho!

Rob

"'05 - Cameron, because I think I understand why we've been losing elections."

A strange statement to make seeing as the last manifesto which lost us an election was pretty much written by Cameron and his Notting Hill mates.

Richard Carey

"But we need to know more than just he cares about community cohesion. Anyone can say that. Adolf Hitler cared about community cohesion..."

What a lovely comparison (and a soundbite for our opposition!). I did say that this leadership election among the membership could be great, if we had the intelligence to keep it unremittingly positive. Oh, dear...

"I would ask this: Are we a party of principle, or simply a sort of focus group led party that hope to gain power by not saying anything controversial?"

I remain consistently amazed by the number of people here and elsewhere who claim to be supporters or members of the Party, but tend to paint gaining power as something negative in some way.

Come on guys, try looking like you want to win with the rest of us. Otherwise, get out of the way, because if we fall short of winning anything else you believe is pretty irrelevant if you never get the chance to implement it!

Daniel Vince-Archer

2005 - anyone but Cameron
2001 - anyone but Portillo
1997 - anyone but Redwood

James Hellyer

Nice to see positive voting there Daniel! Although I admit that's hard when all the candidates you like get knocked out in the first few rounds...

Henry Cook

"A strange statement to make seeing as the last manifesto which lost us an election was pretty much written by Cameron and his Notting Hill mates."

And a well written document it was too - shame about the actual substance produced by the various Shadow Cabinet members. Compared to the Labour manifesto, it was positively riveting.

"2005 - anyone but Cameron
2001 - anyone but Portillo
1997 - anyone but Redwood"

Oh Daniel, you epitomise the positive attitude our party needs to get into power. Is it any wonder...

Daniel Vince-Archer

"Nice to see positive voting there Daniel! Although I admit that's hard when all the candidates you like get knocked out in the first few rounds..."

Of course James H! But when you're happy for any one of a number of people to become leader, you have to concentrate on who you don't want. I'm a Conservative that wants to see the party led by somebody with passion, decency, conviction, principle, electability, sincerity and integrity, as well as staying true to Conservative ideals. What I don't want to see (above other things) is a leader who thinks the answer to the Conservatives' current electoral troubles is to model ourselves on Blair and New Labour (this explains my opposition to Portillo's leadership bid {apart from the fact that he wouldn't know loyalty if it came up to him and slapped him in the face} and the seemingly-inevitable ascension of Cameron {amongst other reasons}) or a leader who would be the biggest PR disaster since Margaret Beckett became the new model in the billboard advertisements for Wonderbra (this explains my opposition to Redwood's leadership bid). Other than this, I'd have been satisfied if any of the other leadership contenders from 2005, 2001 and 1997 had been successful.

The comments to this entry are closed.

About Conservative Home

Subscribe

  • Conservative Home's
    free eMailing List
    Enter your name and email address below:
    Name:
    Email:
    Subscribe    
    Unsubscribe